WWII  was directly responsible for the De Colonization of Africa, because Africans became aware of "Freedom"

Now the US is trying to Colonize the Mid East, to include in the American Empire  Those Countries that do not have US Puppets as their Leaders, the US has invaded, Afghanistan, Iraq, and considering Iran. 
 
Their Terrorists are "Freedom Fighters". They are Demanding that Occupiers/Colonialists Get OUT of  THEIR Country.

Is that unreasonable? I'm more concerned about the 800,000 Gang Bangers in the US, not a couple hundred guys in caves in Pakistan who hate Colonialists !!!!!!!!!

The Second World War was a great turning point in the history of modern Africa. Before the war broke out, the pace of decolonization had been slow. Throughout Africa, colonial regimes seemed too formidable to be overturned.

In 1939, the whole of Africa was under foreign rule. British troops remained in Egypt, an American corporation, the Firestone Company, controlled Liberia, and the Union of South Africa was a Dominion within the British Commonwealth. By this time, every colonial territory had a military force adequate to control its populace. From Cape to Cairo, colonial rule had a firm grip.

Europeans recruited Africans into their armies as well. Over 100,000 African troops were sent to Europe (Italy in 1943 and later to France following the fall of the Vichy regime) and Britain enlisted about 200,000 African soldiers, many of whom served in Burma. Most of these African soldiers had never been out of their native countries before. During active service, they were relatively well paid and most of them learned to read newspapers, listened to radio bulletins, and took interest in world affairs. Perhaps more importantly, by fighting in these armies they learned something about how Europeans think.

The attitudes of Europeans and Africans towards each other were greatly changed as a result of the war. Previously, Europeans had dominated Africans not only because of their more advanced economic system, but because the Europeans believed that they were invincible and superior to Africans. Most Africans believed this to be true. However, the war shattered this myth. Several former colonial powers had been defeated and publicly humiliated. The British, French and Dutch empires in the Far East had collapsed before the Japanese onslaught like straw huts in a storm. Later, as the tide of war changed, the Germans -- themselves once a powerhouse in South West Africa -- showed that they were not invincible.

In combat, African soldiers saw another side of the European whites they had never seen before. Africans witnessed the civilized, sophisticated, and orderly white people mercilessly butchering one another just as their own so-called savage ancestors had done in tribal wars. The Africans perceived no difference between the so-called "primitive" and so-called "civilized" people. In short, they saw through European presumptions that Africans were savages unable to control their own destinies. This discovery had a revolutionary impact on the African mind. The camaraderie between European and African soldiers became stronger. The relationship between the two groups of soldiers differed from that of European colonial officers and traders and African subjects: Europeans no longer appeared to be lofty, superior beings but instead were similar to ordinary Africans.

African soldiers saw white soldiers wounded, dying and dead. The bullet had the same effect on black and white skin alike. After spending four years hunting other (white) soldiers, Africans never again regarded them as gods.

Through the war, the Allied Powers taught their subject peoples that it was not right for Germany to dominate other nations. They taught the subject peoples to fight and die for freedom, rather than live and be subjugated by other nations. Africans learned the lesson well and responded magnificently: they fought, endured great hardships, and died under the magic spell of "freedom."

British officers appealed to Africans to join the armed services, and they engaged in extensive propaganda against the Nazis. (Not just the British, of course -- many of the Allied Powers did the same thing.) But the "subject peoples" did begin to ask questions. The following dialogue, quoted in Modern Africa  by Basil Davidson, spells out the attitude of the African and other subject peoples:

"'Away with Hitler! Down with him!' said the British officer. 'What's wrong with Hitler?' asked the African. 'He wants to rule the whole world,' said the British officer. 'What is wrong with that?' 'He is German, you see,' said the British officer, trying to appeal subtly to the African's tribal consciousness. 'What's wrong with his being German?' 'You see,' began the British officer, trying to explain it in terms that would be conceivable to the African mind, 'it is not good for one tribe to rule another. Each tribe must rule itself. That's only fair. A German must rule Germans, an Italian, Italians and a Frenchman, French people.'"

Note here that the astute British officer did not say 'and British must rule the British.' However, what the British said carried weight with the Africans who rallied by the thousands under the British flag. They joined the war to end the threat of Nazi domination.

Yet, after the war, Africans began to direct their British-inspired spirit of freedom against the former Allied Powers who had extensive colonial empires in Africa.

Throughout the continent anti-colonial movements formed. You said it was wrong for the Germans to rule the world. It is also wrong for both the English and the French to rule Africans. It is wrong for the Portuguese to rule Africans. Thus African freedom seekers, hungry for independence, began to articulate their innermost longings and yearnings.

The fundamental lesson that Africans learned during the war was that they fought and suffered to preserve the freedom they did not have in their own countries. They had a collective consciousness that the freedom for which so many Africans had died abroad was only enjoyed by the whites who ruled Africa and Africans. What was the difference between Hitler and the white Europeans who denied Africans freedom in their native land? Why should Africans be used as the instruments of white people to achieve white freedom? When were the Africans going to be free in the land of their birth? And how could that freedom be achieved? After the war, in 1947, Britain finally ceded independence to India. The subcontinent was partitioned between India and Pakistan, which became independent states within the Commonwealth. The same thing happened with Ceylon, and, upon becoming independent, Burma did not even join the Commonwealth. Both African soldiers and African nationals who were studying in Europe and America watched and listened carefully as Britain lost its hold on the Indian subcontinent.

In 1941, before America was drawn into the war, Franklin Roosevelt and Winston Churchill met on a battleship off the Canadian coast and signed the Atlantic Charter as a statement of their hope for the future of humankind. Afterward, they declared that they would respect the right of all peoples to choose the form of government under which they live and that they wished to see "sovereign right and self-government restored to those who had been deprived." To both the African soldiers and Nationalists, this Atlantic Charter became a great source of inspiration.

The European giants, Britain, France and Germany, came out of the war looking poorer and weaker; the U.S. and USSR became superpowers. Neither had an interest in strengthening the British and French colonial systems, and both had an interest in weakening British and French rule so as to expand their own trade and spheres of influence across Africa.

The many colonized Africans, soldiers, nationalist and peasants all began to demand their independence. Immediately after the war, African Nationalist leaders such as Albert Luthuli, Joshua Nkomo, Kwame Nkrumah, Thomas Sankara and Kenneth Kaunda and Nnadi Azikiwe began to assert Africa for the Africans -- if freedom is good for the Europeans it must be equally good for Africans.

In 1945, a Nigerian serviceman wrote from India to the prominent nationalist leader Herbert Macaulay: "We all overseas soldiers are coming back home with new ideas. We have been told what we fought for. That's 'freedom.' In Africa we want freedom, nothing but freedom."

At the same time, a poet from the Gold Coast had published a satirical poem in a local newspaper, The African Morning Post.   The poem was a parody of Psalms 23.

"The European merchant is my shepherd, and I am in want. He made me to lie down in cocoa farms. He led me beside the waters of great need. The general managers and profiteers frighten me. Thou prepared a reduction in my salary. In the presence of my creditors thou anoint my income with taxes. My expense runs over my income and I will dwell in a rented house forever."

Across the continent African nationalism became uncontrollable, and it became obvious that the colonial days were numbered in Africa. But those who had to achieve their independence by the barrel of the gun had to turn to the U.S., the former USSR and China for military assistance. These three powerhouses of the day were interested in creating their spheres of influence in Africa and naturally they gave African leaders huge amounts of money to fight off colonizers.

In 1957, Ghana gained its independence under the leadership of Nkrumah and other nations soon followed suit. It is clear that without the catalyst of the Second World War, African independence would have been long delayed. Out of the war's great evil came at least this one good -- African Independence.

Therefore, the Africans won the war!

http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/opinion/fyi/
africans-won-the-war-second-world-war-accelerated-
the-independence-movement-106814518.html
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

The ANNOTICO Reports Can be Viewed (With Archives) on:
[Formerly Italy at St Louis]